Syed Mohmad Gaus Rafiuddin v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Judgment
Mr. V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate for respondent No.3. Mr. N.R. Shaikh, AGP for respondent No.1 -- CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI AND SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : JUNE 25, 2012 P.C.: 1] Heard Shri Panpatte, Advocate for petitioner, Advocate Shri Hon for respondent No.3 and Shri Shaikh AGP for respondent No.1. 2] Learned AGP is seeking time to file reply. 2 7450.11wp.odt 3] Advocate Panpatte points out, that there is already a direction by the State Government on 19.10.2010 to implement various Government Resolutions in force and to appoint the petitioners. 4] He submits that the representation made thereafter on
22.1.2011 is still pending. 5] We have looked into the controversy. We find that the representation is pending since last more than one year and petition has been filed in September, 2011. In this situation interest of justice can be met with, by directing respondent Chief Executive Officer, to abide by the Government Resolutions which hold the field and take necessary decision on the said representation within 2 months from today. 6] costs. With these directions, we dispose of the petition. No [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] grt/-
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.